the site's been around for a while, and will probably be around for a while. While there may be quite a bit of truth behind it, especially the parts regarding the fact that the playa is indeed an ecosystem that could use some attention, I tend to think that the verbage is a bit slanted to get the author's point across. It's impossible to have an event the size of BM without some side effects, despite the LNT ideals.

[quote="glam_daddy"]I wonder concidering the name of this section of this post should be concidered a 'rumor' or a 'lie'

the only lies are what is told to you all.
you all beleive it becuase you liek the event which is fine.
but when people say one thing but do anouther i have severe issues. i am a etacher in San Jose and if we did that to our students they would never trust us.
yel burnngman man LLC does that to you everyday and you trust them

No discussion. Thank you. Your sleazoid, round about way of initiating the thread(s) already suggests to this reader that facts are the last fucking thing you want discussed here.

questions yes i want them.

How about just coming out and discussing your agenda.

Own it.

Though I suspect not many here would agree with it you'd at least have the comfort of knowing that you initiated it honestly rather than follow through with your spineless, coward's dialogue.

my agenda is for peopel to be aware of what the truth isbe open mindedbe understanding.i was their in 1989or was it 1990 when burning man first went to the pliya. i was with john law and the san francisco cacophony society first went to blackrock.I was the one who ran the san francisco cacopohony soceities BBS from aroudn 1990 to 1992 i think.

so yes i know what i am talkign aboutso just ask. or are you afraid of the truth? are you afraid that your house of cards in your mind will fall down?

So now what? Are you folks going to hypercriticize the proposed solutions? Be quiet and hope they go away? What's the next move?

Well, for starters, seeing how you behave in any subsequent posts you might contribute to in so far as the rest of us figuring out if you any credibilty - not that you didn't start out of the gate with a huge deficit of the stuff.

First off, and this is a leap of faith perhaps, you need to realize that allanon, RTP and stopbmorg are indeed 3 different people. For example, I can spell and form complete sentences. Allanon, though a teacher, does not represent himself well in print.

That said, we *do* want critical and constructive feedback on the proposal put forth on the www.stopburningman.org site. If some members of the BM community think it is reasonable, and certainly we think it is reasonable, then it would be worthwhile to push the issue with the LLC managers.

If the BM community does not find it reasonable, we will push for it with the LLC, BLM and anyone else who will give it some heed.

We're not going to go away. We have a stake in this as much as the BM community does. We're not disgrunted former burners. We're not people that Larry/Will/Marian somehow personally angered or offended. We actually care about the place, it's beauty, its natural and ecological value.

It is admittedly annoying though to see the mantra of LNT spread so far and wide, while at the same time the LLC itself seems to violate that mantra in many ways. And that's got to stop.

why bother with a proposal for a solution to the problem? The site is stopburningman.org It seems that since the site went up, it was intended more to rally the troops behind a force to stop burningman. There was no intention (based on the content of the site) implied of fixing any of the problems that you mention. It also seems that now that that idea has not produced the intended results, you're changing the mission of stopburningman.org. I didn't care to fully believe that you had an unbiased opinion in your earliest days, nor do I believe that now. In fact, I'm pretty much done visiting the site, as you seem to update it to back up your views on this forum.

bushonk wrote:why bother with a proposal for a solution to the problem? The site is stopburningman.org It seems that since the site went up, it was intended more to rally the troops behind a force to stop burningman. There was no intention (based on the content of the site) implied of fixing any of the problems that you mention. It also seems that now that that idea has not produced the intended results, you're changing the mission of stopburningman.org. I didn't care to fully believe that you had an unbiased opinion in your earliest days, nor do I believe that now. In fact, I'm pretty much done visiting the site, as you seem to update it to back up your views on this forum.

umm the website has solutions listed?
and it was you guys that asked for proofto be submitted
and if you want proff does that not mean thta we have to show it?
and that means updatign the website?

To all the stopburningman people, sock puppets, and/or multiple personalities:

The insane number of threads this whole discussion is happening on seems both detrimental to the board and the topic itself, with all the cross-postings, redundant questions, etc. If you are actually concerned about the environmental impact of the event and not just trying to fuck with our community, please pick one thread to carry on the discussion, or start a single new one, and let's proceed from there. Any post aside from saying "Let's go to this thread" will look suspiciously troll-like, I am thinking.

To everyone else on the board, I respectfully ask that you don't post on any more of these threads until a single one is chosen. I'm sorry about the multiple cross postings and if this seems high-handed. I suppose I could have asked the moderators to intervene, but you know...radical self-reliance and all that.

"Of what use is a philosopher who doesn't hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes